Moon: 1956 flag change was odious, reprehensible

Posted: Sunday, January 26, 2003

Some who support restoring the Confederate battle emblem to prominence on the Georgia flag claim that the adoption of that emblem in 1956 had nothing to do with protesting desegregation, in spite of the simultaneous passage of segregationist acts by the state legislature at that time. They contend this even in spite of the fact that Denmark Groover, a legislator who was one of the sponsors of the flag change, openly admitted that the reason for the change was to protest anti-segregation court rulings. Well, let us then review the events of that year.

Garry

Moon

more Moon columns

The year 1956 saw a Georgia Tech victory in the Sugar Bowl, the first appearance of the "Dear Abby" newspaper column and Elvis Presley's "Don't Be Cruel" single moving to No. 1. In Georgia, then-Governor Marvin Griffin chose to disregard Elvis's lyrical entreaty and delivered a fiery address to the Georgia General Assembly declaring "all attempts to mix the races, whether they be in the classrooms, on the playgrounds, in public conveyances or in any other area of close personal contact on terms of equity, peril the mores of the South.".

The governor also called the U.S. Supreme Court's Brown v. Board of Education decision "tragic" and warned that "Day by day, Georgia moves nearer a showdown with this Federal Supreme Court."

Thus the tone was set for the upcoming state legislative session.

Just days following this address, a bill to add the Confederate battle emblem to Georgia's flag reached the floor of the state Senate. After just one day of consideration, and with little debate, the Senate passed the bill overwhelmingly. However, before the Georgia House could then take up the bill, there was other business to deal with first. Early in February a special joint session of the state House and Senate met to form legislation declaring the Brown v. Board of Education decision "null and void" in Georgia. This legislation became known as the "interposition resolution" -- i.e., the state legislature would "interpose" itself between the people of the state and the evil federal courts.

At the same time, Governor Griffin proposed a series of acts designed to be part of his "massive resistance" campaign against the Supreme Court ruling; one such act gave the governor authority to summarily close any public schools ordered by the courts to integrate. By Feb. 8 the state House passed the "interposition resolution," with Denmark Groover saying it would hearten "the people of the nation interested in maintaining segregation." The very next day, Representative Groover's legislation to change the state flag resoundingly passed in the House, again with little debate before the vote.

But there was no need for debate, of course -- everyone knew exactly what the symbolism of adopting the Confederate battle emblem implied. The segregationist movement had appropriated the emblem by then, most notably when it became the symbol of the Dixiecrat Party. The Dixiecrats, as erstwhile Senate Majority Leader Trent Lott now understands all too well, ran Strom Thurmond for president in the 1948 national elections on a platform that unabashedly stood for preserving segregation of the races.

So on Feb. 13, 1956, Governor Griffin signed the law that added the Confederate battle emblem to the official state flag. On that same day -- by sheer coincidence, no doubt -- the state Senate unanimously adopted the "interposition resolution" to nullify the Brown v. Board of Education ruling.

Remarkably, the most vocal opponents in 1956 of the flag change were Confederate organizations, such as the United Daughters of the Confederacy, the Ladies Memorial Association and the John B. Gordon Camp of the Sons of Confederate Veterans. Their reasons for opposing the change differed, but in general these groups did not believe appropriating the battle emblem for the state flag was a proper way to commemorate the Confederacy or Confederate veterans.

The contemporaneous passage in 1956 of new segregation laws and the flag change was not mere coincidence but rather a concerted political strategy, both calculated and reprehensible in equal measure. Even Denmark Groover came to regret his actions; just before his death in 2001 he said that the flag issue "has become the most divisive issue on the political spectrum and needs to be put to rest."